Laura Hodson, Adrienne Eastlake, Herbers Richard
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education, Collegiate Leader in Occupational Safety and Health.
J Chem Health Saf. 2019 Mar-Apr;26(2):12-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jchas.2018.10.002. Epub 2018 Nov 11.
In 2012, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration issued the revised Hazard Communication Standard to bring the US in closer alignment with the Globally Harmonized System of Classification and Labeling of Chemicals, and make the exchange of health and safety information more effective. To evaluate the impact of this change on the reliability and accuracy of safety data sheets, a sample of safety data sheets specific to engineered nanomaterials was obtained by using an internet search engine and subsequently evaluated. These safety data sheets were evaluated using a modified Kimlisch et al. (1997) criteria for ranking the quality of data into categories of reliability and the Eastlake et al. (2012) ranking scheme for scoring four categories. While 86 safety data sheets for nanomaterials were obtained during 2016-2017, 19 of these had no date of completion or revision and could not be evaluated since it was impossible to determine if they were pre or post 2012, when the revised OSHA Hazard Communication Standard was issued. The remaining 67 safety data sheets were ranked by the Kimlisch et al. criteria, and 28.4% (19) were found to be reliable without restrictions (excellent), 35.8% (24) were reliable with restrictions (good), and 35.8% (24) were determined to be unreliable. Evaluating the SDSs using the Eastlake et al. ranking scheme resulted in 3% (2) as satisfactory, 17.9% (12) as being in need of improvement, and 79% (53) in need of significant improvement. It is noteworthy that out of the 79% in need of significant improvement, 25.4% (17) did not have enough data to be evaluated. This evaluation of nanomaterial safety data sheets revealed that the quality of information on many still cannot be relied upon to offer adequate information on the inherent health and safety hazards, including handling and storage of engineered nanomaterials.
2012年,美国职业安全与健康管理局发布了修订后的《危险公示标准》,以使美国更紧密地与《全球化学品统一分类和标签制度》保持一致,并提高健康与安全信息交流的有效性。为评估这一变化对安全数据表的可靠性和准确性的影响,通过使用互联网搜索引擎获取了特定工程纳米材料的安全数据表样本,并随后进行了评估。这些安全数据表采用了经修改的金利施等人(1997年)将数据质量排名为可靠性类别的标准以及伊斯特莱克等人(2012年)对四个类别进行评分的排名方案进行评估。虽然在2016 - 2017年期间获取了86份纳米材料安全数据表,但其中19份没有完成或修订日期,无法进行评估,因为无法确定它们是在2012年(修订后的美国职业安全与健康管理局危险公示标准发布之时)之前还是之后。其余67份安全数据表按照金利施等人的标准进行排名,发现28.4%(19份)无限制可靠(优秀),35.8%(24份)有限制可靠(良好),35.8%(24份)不可靠。使用伊斯特莱克等人的排名方案对安全数据表进行评估,结果显示3%(2份)令人满意,17.9%(12份)需要改进,79%(53份)需要大幅改进。值得注意的是,在需要大幅改进的79%中,25.4%(17份)没有足够的数据进行评估。对纳米材料安全数据表的这一评估表明,许多关于纳米材料的信息质量仍不可靠,无法提供关于其固有健康与安全危害(包括工程纳米材料的处理和储存)的充分信息。